East Penn Twp. v. W.A. Swartz and S.L. Swartz

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant consented to a search by \lifting his hands about eight inches from his legs\ after being asked \Mind if I check you?\
• holding that the Fourth Amendment does not require officers who request bus passengers’ consent to inform passengers of their right to withhold consent
• holding that the Fourth Amendment does not require officers who request bus passengers’ consent to inform passengers of their right to withhold consent
• recognizing that most officers are armed, therefore, the presence of a holstered firearm is unlikely to be coercive absent active brandishing of the weapon
• concluding that individuals were not seized, in part because the officer “did not brandish a weapon or make any intimidating movements”
• holding that there is nothing inherently coercive about police questioning or asking for consent to search

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).